HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201700007 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2018-06-22Page 1 of 4
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
June 22, 2018
Justin Shimp
Shimp Engineering
201 E. Main Street Suite M
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: Review Comments – Resubmittal Materials for ZMA-2017-00007 “Hogwaller Farm”
Mr. Shimp:
Thank you for your recent resubmittal of revised application materials (received May 21, 2018) for
Zoning Map Amendment ZMA-2017-00007, per our recent conversations. Members of the Planning
Division, Zoning Division, and Engineering Division of the Community Development Department
have reviewed your resubmittal materials, and the following remaining issues and concerns have been
identified (see page 2).
Staff believes these concerns should be resolved through the resubmittal of revised application
materials before the proposal goes to your scheduled public hearing with the Board of Supervisors.
These items are important in order for staff to be able to recommend approval. Should you choose to
provide revised application materials, they would need to be received in complete, final form no later
than Monday, July 2.
We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Whether you choose to submit revised
application materials or not, your application remains scheduled for a Board of Supervisors public
hearing on Wednesday, August 1 unless you request a deferral in writing.
Please contact me using the information provided below if you would like to set up a meeting to
discuss this comment letter or any other aspect of your proposed project, or to share any questions or
requests for assistance you may have. I remain available to assist.
Sincerely,
Tim Padalino, AICP
Senior Planner | Community Development Department | Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 x. 3088 | tpadalino@albemarle.org
Page 2 of 4
Recommended Changes:
1. Staff acknowledge the addition of proffer #4 regarding “site development” which commits the
property to be developed in general accord with the conceptual plan.
However, staff believe this proffer should be revised to include: identification of the major
elements shown on the conceptual plan (undisturbed riparian buffer; signage for undisturbed
riparian buffer); and a clause which confirms that any future determinations about the use of the
property being in general accord with the conceptual plan will be “as determined by the Zoning
Administrator.”
Staff also believe that, to be consistent with other approved ZMA applications, this “site
development” / “general accord” proffer should be listed first (#1).
2. Staff acknowledge the addition of proffer #3, committing to the prohibition of “intensive
livestock” such that “livestock activity shall not include hogs and cattle on the property.”
However, staff believe this language should be revised to achieve consistency with the language
and definitions in the County Code; specifically, “hogs” and “cattle” should be revised to “swine”
and “cows,” respectively. See comment #3, below.
3. In order to recommend approval of this proposal (despite the Planning Commission (PC)
recommendation for denial), staff believe it is very important for the revised proffer statement
[and any/all other revised application materials submitted after the PC public hearing and prior to
the Board of Supervisors (BOS) public hearing] to very closely reflect the discussion and
deliberations during the public hearing and application review conducted by the PC on May 1,
2018. The PC hearing and subsequent discussion focused on agricultural operations (including
agriculture, nursery, and/or forestry) as the only proposed use of the property; however, the
proffer statement does not explicitly commit to any restrictions on the potential future use(s) of
the property.
Staff believe a commitment to restrict the future use(s) of the property is very important.
Specifically, staff strongly recommend the following commitment be made in order to ensure the
deliberations and discussion of the PC are accurately carried forward:
The use of the property shall be restricted to the following by right uses pursuant to Section
10.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, inclusive of modifications as shown in underline or strikethrough
typeface:
3. Agriculture, forestry, and fishery uses, excluding livestock activity involving swine or
cows, and excluding agriculture, forestry, or fishery uses within the designated “riparian
buffer” area.
6. Water, sewer, energy, communications distribution facilities (reference 5.1.12).
7. Accessory uses and buildings including major home occupations (reference 5.2A),
minor home occupations (reference 5.2A), and storage buildings.
9. Public uses (reference 5.1.12).
21. Stormwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or
subdivision plat.
27. Farm stands (reference 5.1.47).30. Events and activities at agricultural operations
authorized by right under section 5.1.58(d).
Additionally, the property may also be used for the following special uses pursuant to Section
10.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the applicable requirements of the Zoning Ordinance,
provided that a special use permit is approved:
Page 3 of 4
39. Hydroelectric power generation (reference 5.1.26).
4. Staff acknowledge the addition of proffer #2, committing to “riparian buffer area designation”
through the installation and maintenance of “signage denoting the extent of the riparian buffer.”
However, staff believe this language should be revised to achieve greater clarity, and to be more
effective and more easily enforceable.
Specifically, this proffer should be revised to include:
more information about who will install and maintain the signage (the owner?);
more information about the timing of this commitment (to be installed prior to any of the
uses/activities listed in the proffer statement being commenced?); and
more information about the duration of this signage being maintained (in perpetuity?).
Additionally, this proffer should be further modified to include a commitment which specifies
that the size, type of material(s), content, number, and locations of the signs shall be approved by
the Zoning Administrator and County Engineer.
5. Proffer #1 “riparian buffer” is technically written in such a way that the silvicultural exemptions
from stream buffer regulations that are provided for in the Water Protection Ordinance are not
accounted for. To address this, and to ensure that the commitment to an undisturbed riparian
buffer is effectively established (in keeping with previous discussions between staff and applicant,
and in keeping with Planning Commission public hearing and deliberations), staff strongly
recommend this proffer be modified as follows:
RIPARIAN BUFFER: An undisturbed riparian buffer area (“riparian buffer”) managed in
accordance with County Code § 17-601 will be established and maintained for perpetuity,
provided that the area within the riparian buffer shall not be eligible for the “silvicultural
activities” exemption that is otherwise provided by County Code § 17-602(c). The riparian buffer
will extend to 100’ from the top of bank of Moore’s Creek or to the limits of the floodway,
whichever is greater. A copy of County Code § 17-601 is attached herein as Attachment A for
reference purposes.
6. Staff believe the proffered Conceptual Plan should be revised as shown in the attached exhibit ,
and as summarized below:
Add additional “Floodway” and “Flood Fringe” labels;
Delete labels for “WPO Buffer,” as these are technically not shown accurately;
Delete cross-hatching for “WPO Buffer” area, as the area shown is technically not correct,
and as the cross-hatching should highlight the “proffered riparian buffer” (see next
comment);
Provide cross-hatching to highlight the “proffered riparian buffer” area;
The heavy line weight being used to show the limits of the “proffered riparian buffer”
should not extend beyond the property boundaries for the subject property; the boundary
between floodway and floodway fringe should be shown off-site on parcel 21A, but using
the same thin dashed line type as shown for this floodway/floodway fringe boundary on
parcel 20A; and the heavy line weight shown on parcel 20A should be deleted.
Provide revision date.
7. Finally, for informational purposes, please be advised that the provisions and regulations
contained in Zoning Ordinance Sections 4 (“General Regulations”), 5 (“Supplemental
Regulations”), and 30 (“Overlay Districts”), as well as County Code Chapter 17 (“Water
Protection Ordinance”), shall all apply and remain in effect if the zoning map amendment is
approved. As it pertains to proposed uses contained in your ZMA application materials, this
includes (but is not limited to):
Page 4 of 4
a prohibition on the storage of gasoline or other petroleum products, pesticides,
herbicides, insecticides, or other poisons or similar materials in the floodway fringe (Z.O.
30.3.11); and
agricultural operations within the floodway fringe would require a Floodplain
Development permit before that use could be lawfully commenced (Z.O. 30.3.12.A).
ATTACHMENT B